Does suction in Mini PCNL mitigate rise in intrarenal pressure? A prospective randomised study.

IF 2.2 2区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Madhu Sudan Agrawal, Naveen Kumar, Dilip Mishra, Anurag Yadav, Laxmi Kant Sharma, Gaurav Sharma, Sachin Patel, Diptiranjan Bai
{"title":"Does suction in Mini PCNL mitigate rise in intrarenal pressure? A prospective randomised study.","authors":"Madhu Sudan Agrawal, Naveen Kumar, Dilip Mishra, Anurag Yadav, Laxmi Kant Sharma, Gaurav Sharma, Sachin Patel, Diptiranjan Bai","doi":"10.1007/s00240-025-01804-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The rise in intra-renal pressure during Mini PCNL (percutaneous nephrolithotripsy) potentially leads to pyelovenous backflow and infectious complications. This prospective randomized study compares intra-renal pressure (IRP) in patients undergoing Mini PCNL (mPCNL) procedure with and without suction for renal stones. Suction mPCNL is expected to lower IRP by continuously aspirating irrigation fluid and stone fragments, thereby enhancing procedural safety. A total of 100 patients with kidney stones measuring 1-4 cm were randomized into two groups: Mini PCNL with suction (n = 50) and Mini PCNL without suction (n = 50). IRP was measured using a pressure transducer connected to a ureteral catheter. Key outcome measures included intra-renal pressure, stone-free rate, operative time, and complication rates. The suction mPCNL group demonstrated a significantly lower IRP (16.92 ± 2.93 mmHg) compared to the non-suction group (19.48 ± 4.77 mmHg, p = 0.002). The suction group also experienced shorter mean operative times (35.98 ± 14.10 min vs. 47.12 ± 15.36 min, p = 0.001) and lithotripsy times (19.50 ± 11.70 min vs. 26.24 ± 10.49 min, p = 0.003). The stone-free rate was higher in the suction group though this difference was not statistically significant. Likewise, the complication rates, including postoperative infection rates (fever and urosepsis) showed a downward trend in the suction group, however the difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Suction mPCNL effectively reduces IRP, shortens operative time, maintains a comparable stone-free rate, making it a safer and more efficient alternative to traditional mPCNL. This study highlights the potential advantages of integrating suction mechanisms to control IRP and improve patient outcomes in PCNL procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":23411,"journal":{"name":"Urolithiasis","volume":"53 1","pages":"132"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urolithiasis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-025-01804-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The rise in intra-renal pressure during Mini PCNL (percutaneous nephrolithotripsy) potentially leads to pyelovenous backflow and infectious complications. This prospective randomized study compares intra-renal pressure (IRP) in patients undergoing Mini PCNL (mPCNL) procedure with and without suction for renal stones. Suction mPCNL is expected to lower IRP by continuously aspirating irrigation fluid and stone fragments, thereby enhancing procedural safety. A total of 100 patients with kidney stones measuring 1-4 cm were randomized into two groups: Mini PCNL with suction (n = 50) and Mini PCNL without suction (n = 50). IRP was measured using a pressure transducer connected to a ureteral catheter. Key outcome measures included intra-renal pressure, stone-free rate, operative time, and complication rates. The suction mPCNL group demonstrated a significantly lower IRP (16.92 ± 2.93 mmHg) compared to the non-suction group (19.48 ± 4.77 mmHg, p = 0.002). The suction group also experienced shorter mean operative times (35.98 ± 14.10 min vs. 47.12 ± 15.36 min, p = 0.001) and lithotripsy times (19.50 ± 11.70 min vs. 26.24 ± 10.49 min, p = 0.003). The stone-free rate was higher in the suction group though this difference was not statistically significant. Likewise, the complication rates, including postoperative infection rates (fever and urosepsis) showed a downward trend in the suction group, however the difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Suction mPCNL effectively reduces IRP, shortens operative time, maintains a comparable stone-free rate, making it a safer and more efficient alternative to traditional mPCNL. This study highlights the potential advantages of integrating suction mechanisms to control IRP and improve patient outcomes in PCNL procedures.

Mini PCNL吸痰是否能缓解肾内压升高?一项前瞻性随机研究。
在Mini PCNL(经皮肾镜碎石术)中,肾内压力升高可能导致肾盂静脉回流和感染并发症。这项前瞻性随机研究比较了接受Mini PCNL (mPCNL)治疗肾结石的患者在有和没有抽吸的情况下的肾内压(IRP)。抽吸式mPCNL有望通过持续抽吸灌洗液和碎石碎片来降低IRP,从而提高手术安全性。将100例直径1 ~ 4 cm的肾结石患者随机分为有吸痰的Mini PCNL组(n = 50)和无吸痰的Mini PCNL组(n = 50)。使用连接输尿管导管的压力传感器测量IRP。主要结局指标包括肾内压、结石清除率、手术时间和并发症发生率。抽吸mPCNL组IRP(16.92±2.93 mmHg)明显低于非抽吸组(19.48±4.77 mmHg, p = 0.002)。吸痰组平均手术时间(35.98±14.10 min)比47.12±15.36 min (p = 0.001),碎石时间(19.50±11.70 min)比26.24±10.49 min (p = 0.003)。吸痰组结石清除率较高,但差异无统计学意义。同样,吸引组并发症发生率,包括术后感染率(发热、尿脓毒症)均呈下降趋势,但差异无统计学意义(p < 0.05)。抽吸式mPCNL有效地降低了IRP,缩短了操作时间,保持了相当的无石率,使其成为传统mPCNL的更安全、更高效的替代方案。本研究强调了在PCNL手术中整合吸引机制来控制IRP和改善患者预后的潜在优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Urolithiasis
Urolithiasis UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
6.50%
发文量
74
期刊介绍: Official Journal of the International Urolithiasis Society The journal aims to publish original articles in the fields of clinical and experimental investigation only within the sphere of urolithiasis and its related areas of research. The journal covers all aspects of urolithiasis research including the diagnosis, epidemiology, pathogenesis, genetics, clinical biochemistry, open and non-invasive surgical intervention, nephrological investigation, chemistry and prophylaxis of the disorder. The Editor welcomes contributions on topics of interest to urologists, nephrologists, radiologists, clinical biochemists, epidemiologists, nutritionists, basic scientists and nurses working in that field. Contributions may be submitted as full-length articles or as rapid communications in the form of Letters to the Editor. Articles should be original and should contain important new findings from carefully conducted studies designed to produce statistically significant data. Please note that we no longer publish articles classified as Case Reports. Editorials and review articles may be published by invitation from the Editorial Board. All submissions are peer-reviewed. Through an electronic system for the submission and review of manuscripts, the Editor and Associate Editors aim to make publication accessible as quickly as possible to a large number of readers throughout the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信